LA PREMIERE
12/09//19
THE DEAD DON'T DIE NEW
website
RATE: 5/10
This film would be terrific to watch for those your love the amazing combination: zombie plus comedy genre. I am not a fan seriously this is why please do not take my review as an advice to action. Please go and seethe film yourself to have a strong opinion. You might be very much attracted by the number of stars who are the characters in the film including some of the best Hollywood actors. What this movie is about? Bill Murray, Denny Glover, Tilda Swinton, , Steve Bushemy and many others directed by Jim Jarmush. It is a comedy, horror and fantasy at the same time - quite a strange blend to be honest. How is that? The plot is really... how can I say it honestly... dumb. Zombies walk freely around town while police is pretending they do something. No one knows what zombies really want. But we know for sure they want something they were addicted to in real life: coffee, candies, games etc etc... The action takes place in some town called Centreville. Strangely all the technical equipment stops working in the town. The zombies are really advanced I guess as apart from their own addictions (youtube and wi-fi) they want human flesh too. Sorry WTF? I can not believe even that I write a review on such film! The film does not make any sense at all. Would you like some entertainment? But I do not have any entertainment! Sorry! The actors play really seriously as it is a role of their lifetime. Good performance! There will be aliens, Samurai swords and hell knows what - please expect unexpected! It is a comedy disaster in its best way! No one laughed! No one in the audience! I would leave the cinemas but I felt dedicated. I did not like the film. But I will give it at least 5.10 respecting the big stars and paying my tribute to those I love. What a shame indeed and what in the hell they were thinking agreeing to take these roles? It is a time wasted for me but you might find it funny and entertaining - I do not know...
website
RATE: 5/10
This film would be terrific to watch for those your love the amazing combination: zombie plus comedy genre. I am not a fan seriously this is why please do not take my review as an advice to action. Please go and seethe film yourself to have a strong opinion. You might be very much attracted by the number of stars who are the characters in the film including some of the best Hollywood actors. What this movie is about? Bill Murray, Denny Glover, Tilda Swinton, , Steve Bushemy and many others directed by Jim Jarmush. It is a comedy, horror and fantasy at the same time - quite a strange blend to be honest. How is that? The plot is really... how can I say it honestly... dumb. Zombies walk freely around town while police is pretending they do something. No one knows what zombies really want. But we know for sure they want something they were addicted to in real life: coffee, candies, games etc etc... The action takes place in some town called Centreville. Strangely all the technical equipment stops working in the town. The zombies are really advanced I guess as apart from their own addictions (youtube and wi-fi) they want human flesh too. Sorry WTF? I can not believe even that I write a review on such film! The film does not make any sense at all. Would you like some entertainment? But I do not have any entertainment! Sorry! The actors play really seriously as it is a role of their lifetime. Good performance! There will be aliens, Samurai swords and hell knows what - please expect unexpected! It is a comedy disaster in its best way! No one laughed! No one in the audience! I would leave the cinemas but I felt dedicated. I did not like the film. But I will give it at least 5.10 respecting the big stars and paying my tribute to those I love. What a shame indeed and what in the hell they were thinking agreeing to take these roles? It is a time wasted for me but you might find it funny and entertaining - I do not know...
WEATHERING WITH YOU NEW
website
RATE: 10/10
The high school graduate Hodaka Morisima comes from one of the islands where he was born and raised up to a busy city of Tokyo with not a single penny in his pocket. He goes through many hardships before eh fortune gives him finally her warm and loving hand.
With the simply good luck on his side he joins the magazine that writes on metaphysical and super-natural topics.
One day Hodaka meets with the girl whose name is Hina Amano, who has a wonderful natural gift: she has an ability to remove the clouds and clear up rains. She uses her inner powers to change the weather. When she is with you there is always sunny and the weather is perfect.
They meet in the middle of Tokyo under the rain to start a new life in the big city. It is a big love. They are wiling to give their lives for this love. Please prepare to cry too as this film is so heart opening.
Hina is a very cheerful girl, she is never upset. One day the weather just turns into a real disaster and gets Tokyo Together Hina and Hodaka can change this world forever but will they stand the opposition? The people that try to accuse Hodaka and Hina?
The anime director Shinkai Makoto created a story about a global miracle that is a secret to the whole world and only you and me know about it.
I understand why this film was created. The weather is very important to Japanese people. They practically live IN THE SEA. The islands are surrounded by ocean and waters. If you are from the country the weather means so much to you as your life and crop depends on it. It is also important in Tokyo - the city has survived so many natural disasters. Japanese people should be extremely courageous and it is understandable why they talk about the good weather as a miracle created by a little girl it is fragile and very unpredictable. like a young woman's heart
The film is not only about love, no, it is about what surrounds all of us as humans and only people of Japan: we are dependent on weather and the climate is so easy to damage as we keep damaging our planet day after day , generation after generation.
The graphics is simply superb: it is tender and full of gorgeous masterfully crafted artistic details.
website
RATE: 10/10
The high school graduate Hodaka Morisima comes from one of the islands where he was born and raised up to a busy city of Tokyo with not a single penny in his pocket. He goes through many hardships before eh fortune gives him finally her warm and loving hand.
With the simply good luck on his side he joins the magazine that writes on metaphysical and super-natural topics.
One day Hodaka meets with the girl whose name is Hina Amano, who has a wonderful natural gift: she has an ability to remove the clouds and clear up rains. She uses her inner powers to change the weather. When she is with you there is always sunny and the weather is perfect.
They meet in the middle of Tokyo under the rain to start a new life in the big city. It is a big love. They are wiling to give their lives for this love. Please prepare to cry too as this film is so heart opening.
Hina is a very cheerful girl, she is never upset. One day the weather just turns into a real disaster and gets Tokyo Together Hina and Hodaka can change this world forever but will they stand the opposition? The people that try to accuse Hodaka and Hina?
The anime director Shinkai Makoto created a story about a global miracle that is a secret to the whole world and only you and me know about it.
I understand why this film was created. The weather is very important to Japanese people. They practically live IN THE SEA. The islands are surrounded by ocean and waters. If you are from the country the weather means so much to you as your life and crop depends on it. It is also important in Tokyo - the city has survived so many natural disasters. Japanese people should be extremely courageous and it is understandable why they talk about the good weather as a miracle created by a little girl it is fragile and very unpredictable. like a young woman's heart
The film is not only about love, no, it is about what surrounds all of us as humans and only people of Japan: we are dependent on weather and the climate is so easy to damage as we keep damaging our planet day after day , generation after generation.
The graphics is simply superb: it is tender and full of gorgeous masterfully crafted artistic details.
DOWNTON ABBEY NEW
website
review and photos from the opening night: Anthony Wayne
Loyal fans of the hit TV series Downton Abbey will be gleefully rushing to the cinemas for the chance to see the cast reunite for the new feature film released this month. But what should you do if like me, you have not watched the TV series at all? With six seasons of the series it would have taken me over 2 days non-stop round the clock to binge watch the complete series. So rather than breaking out my Mum’s box set to prepare for the film – I did one better and invited her to accompany me at the premiere. My Mum has seen every episode, and gave me a crash five minute run through on who everybody is.
Coming in at 2 hours there’s little time for setting the scene or catching us up. The film is set in 1927 - a couple of years after the TV series ends and stars many of the original key characters. It was hard not to feel overwhelmed jumping in to the large ensemble of characters without having any prior knowledge. The film wastes no time reintroducing us to the Crawley family and to the staff who serve them. While those unfamiliar with the series may initially struggle learning everyone’s names and connecting the dots between characters, the relatively simple plot still stands on its own.
The sweeping aerial shots of the grand estate are absolutely breath-taking, and with the orchestral strings on the soundtrack we are taken into the lavish fairy-tale world of Downton Abbey. The movie opens with the arrival of a letter from Buckingham Palace announcing that King George V and Queen Mary will visit Downton. News of the royal visit brings about a flutter with a dinner and parade to organise. Lady Mary takes on the task of overseeing the preparations and brings the former head butler Carson out of retirement for the important occasion. There is much excitement and stress among the downstairs servants as everybody works through a long to do list of items making sure every surface of the house sparkles. When the servants learn that the royals will travel with their own staff, meaning that they will be deprived of the opportunity to get to wait on the king and queen, they set out as a team to find a way to defend Downton’s honour.
The high stakes visit is the focal point for all the drama unleashing scandal, romance and intrigue. The narrative is delivered to us much like a TV show with bite sized scenes weaving between several sub plots including the matriarch of the family Dowager Countess consumed with a feud with her cousin, and Thomas Barrow wrestling with his sexuality and visits an underground gay club. Mostly light-hearted and enjoyable, fans will surely be satisfied and newcomers will be drawn in by the enchanting charm.
website
review and photos from the opening night: Anthony Wayne
Loyal fans of the hit TV series Downton Abbey will be gleefully rushing to the cinemas for the chance to see the cast reunite for the new feature film released this month. But what should you do if like me, you have not watched the TV series at all? With six seasons of the series it would have taken me over 2 days non-stop round the clock to binge watch the complete series. So rather than breaking out my Mum’s box set to prepare for the film – I did one better and invited her to accompany me at the premiere. My Mum has seen every episode, and gave me a crash five minute run through on who everybody is.
Coming in at 2 hours there’s little time for setting the scene or catching us up. The film is set in 1927 - a couple of years after the TV series ends and stars many of the original key characters. It was hard not to feel overwhelmed jumping in to the large ensemble of characters without having any prior knowledge. The film wastes no time reintroducing us to the Crawley family and to the staff who serve them. While those unfamiliar with the series may initially struggle learning everyone’s names and connecting the dots between characters, the relatively simple plot still stands on its own.
The sweeping aerial shots of the grand estate are absolutely breath-taking, and with the orchestral strings on the soundtrack we are taken into the lavish fairy-tale world of Downton Abbey. The movie opens with the arrival of a letter from Buckingham Palace announcing that King George V and Queen Mary will visit Downton. News of the royal visit brings about a flutter with a dinner and parade to organise. Lady Mary takes on the task of overseeing the preparations and brings the former head butler Carson out of retirement for the important occasion. There is much excitement and stress among the downstairs servants as everybody works through a long to do list of items making sure every surface of the house sparkles. When the servants learn that the royals will travel with their own staff, meaning that they will be deprived of the opportunity to get to wait on the king and queen, they set out as a team to find a way to defend Downton’s honour.
The high stakes visit is the focal point for all the drama unleashing scandal, romance and intrigue. The narrative is delivered to us much like a TV show with bite sized scenes weaving between several sub plots including the matriarch of the family Dowager Countess consumed with a feud with her cousin, and Thomas Barrow wrestling with his sexuality and visits an underground gay club. Mostly light-hearted and enjoyable, fans will surely be satisfied and newcomers will be drawn in by the enchanting charm.
NTL: THE LEHMAN TRILOGY NEW
website
RATE: 10/10
The 164 Years of the American Dream: The Lehman Brothers Trilogy
America has been the promised land for immigrants and seekers of a better life for many centuries. This is the land where you can start all over again, you can create yourself and your life out of nothing. The American Dream is a symbol that is closely related to another expression: “self-made man”. This expression belongs to Henry Clay (an eighteenth-century lawyer and public figure). He described it as if success does not depend on external conditions but more on the person himself/herself. The greatest example of a self-made man was Benjamin Franklin.
In 1844 Haim Lehman originally from Bavaria, the eldest of three brothers arrived to American shores. The arrivals registration clerk could not pronounce his name so Haim became Henry. Henry made his first step as a resident of the United States by his name changed. "Everything changes here in America, even your name”. Having settled in Alabama newly named Henry opened his store, haberdashery called G. Lehman. Later in 1847 the second brother Emmanuel moved to the United States and the company became known as G. Lehman and Bro. Since 1850 upon the arrival of the youngest brother Mayer the company acquired its future worldwide famous name - Lehman Brothers. Now in the XXI century many of us know it as that very bank from which the collapse (presumably) of the 2008 global banking crisis began. The audience of the NT (and us in the cinemas) have a unique opportunity to learn the story of this super-giant, the story which is entertaining, very smartly built and rather exciting.
I would like to call this performance "a saga". No wonder Sam Mendes, the director of the production, worked on it for three years. It is complex and it is amazing. It is an ironic and lively play by Italian Stephen Massini that won the Medici Essay Award in 2018. The playwrighter Ben Power adapted it for the stage of the Piccadilly Theater with the participation of the entire small troupe that consists of only three male actors.
Yes, surprisingly the story of almost two centuries with many characters is played by three actors! They are Simon Russell Beale (Henry), Ben Miles (Emmaunuel) and Adam Godley (Meyer). They play all the roles in this play: from sultry beauties to the young offsprings of the Lehman family, from the company business partners to the storyteller. The action does not stop for a minute of this intense production, the actors talk either from the first or the third person. On the stage there are a maximum of three people at a time while the actors can be twice as many. There is no changing of either the costumes or the scenery. Not surprisingly the three actors became the nominees for the Olivier Prize. There are true, masterly performed transformations. Sometimes it literally takes place in seconds that keeps the audience alert and focused.
The scenery is very much minimalistic. All the action takes place in a transparent rotating glass cube which is filled with modern office furniture and many boxes. The background behind the cube is created by the video projections - at the back of the scene, showing us either the Statue of Liberty or the views of Alabama taking us at the very end somewhere to the top of the business center of New York. We understand that this cube which at first symbolized the amazing magic box called America. The scenery narrows to an ordinary office in a skyscraper, one of many. The stage designer Es Devlin was also nominated for Olivier Award for this phenomenal work.
Two main colors (black, white) are in play and the whole palette of their combinations work in the play. The wall backdrop is monochrome, the costumes of the protagonists are strict: there are black frock coats of the mid-19th century. Even the flowers in the vase are minimalistic: white tulips. If one looks to the right bottom corner of the stage he will find the fourth character though: Candida Caldicott. She is the musical director of the performance. Concurrently she is a pianist-tapper (live pianist) who maintains the atmosphere of the performance throughout the entire action.
There is the fifth element though: the creators don’t talk about it as they talk about the musical component of the production, but it is there and it plays an equally significant role in the play: it is the finest, the subtlest humor with which the story is told. I found myself laughing constantly. “Who knew that Potato knows how to think” and what charming ladies come from Russell Beale and Adam Godley: each lady is with her own character and her own appearance. Although on the stage there is the same man in a tailcoat in front of us and sometimes even with a beard we see multiple characters... "We must change the sign" sounds already simbolically with each new milestone in the history of the company. It seems to be trifle but thanks to such trifles we become attached to the characters limitlessly.
As I already said the action often goes into the format of the story telling from a narrator: “He took a deep breath, took his suitcase and quickly went despite the fact that he did not know where to go... " The Lehman Brothers Trilogy is unique as it will not be interesting only to the theater lovers but to those who are far from the theater. The harsh world of bigwigs comes to life in front of our eyes: there is no pathos or hidden morality in history. We are simply given the opportunity to see how this happens, what big business is, how money make even bigger money and what sacrifices people do make this American dream stay alive.
The story starts with three brothers (“Heads”, “Hands” and “Potatoes”), they make decisions together, and they act like one entity. When the eldest brother leaves they mourn for weeks as their ancestors bequeathed. When the last of the brothers left the family compromised on mornings that went for hours only. When Philip Lehman (the most significant of the generation of the Lehman children) left, no one was mourning. The same thing happened with their heritage: built with a burning heart, albeit in the concept of “money makes money”, the empire fell apart like dust. There was nobody and nothing left of those people who came to catch that American Dream.
We define the moral of the story ourselves. Perhaps this is the main magic of the theater: for almost four hours of the breathtaking experiences these people are no longer pages from the boring school textbook on American history but sometimes lively and touching destiny of real people.
website
RATE: 10/10
The 164 Years of the American Dream: The Lehman Brothers Trilogy
America has been the promised land for immigrants and seekers of a better life for many centuries. This is the land where you can start all over again, you can create yourself and your life out of nothing. The American Dream is a symbol that is closely related to another expression: “self-made man”. This expression belongs to Henry Clay (an eighteenth-century lawyer and public figure). He described it as if success does not depend on external conditions but more on the person himself/herself. The greatest example of a self-made man was Benjamin Franklin.
In 1844 Haim Lehman originally from Bavaria, the eldest of three brothers arrived to American shores. The arrivals registration clerk could not pronounce his name so Haim became Henry. Henry made his first step as a resident of the United States by his name changed. "Everything changes here in America, even your name”. Having settled in Alabama newly named Henry opened his store, haberdashery called G. Lehman. Later in 1847 the second brother Emmanuel moved to the United States and the company became known as G. Lehman and Bro. Since 1850 upon the arrival of the youngest brother Mayer the company acquired its future worldwide famous name - Lehman Brothers. Now in the XXI century many of us know it as that very bank from which the collapse (presumably) of the 2008 global banking crisis began. The audience of the NT (and us in the cinemas) have a unique opportunity to learn the story of this super-giant, the story which is entertaining, very smartly built and rather exciting.
I would like to call this performance "a saga". No wonder Sam Mendes, the director of the production, worked on it for three years. It is complex and it is amazing. It is an ironic and lively play by Italian Stephen Massini that won the Medici Essay Award in 2018. The playwrighter Ben Power adapted it for the stage of the Piccadilly Theater with the participation of the entire small troupe that consists of only three male actors.
Yes, surprisingly the story of almost two centuries with many characters is played by three actors! They are Simon Russell Beale (Henry), Ben Miles (Emmaunuel) and Adam Godley (Meyer). They play all the roles in this play: from sultry beauties to the young offsprings of the Lehman family, from the company business partners to the storyteller. The action does not stop for a minute of this intense production, the actors talk either from the first or the third person. On the stage there are a maximum of three people at a time while the actors can be twice as many. There is no changing of either the costumes or the scenery. Not surprisingly the three actors became the nominees for the Olivier Prize. There are true, masterly performed transformations. Sometimes it literally takes place in seconds that keeps the audience alert and focused.
The scenery is very much minimalistic. All the action takes place in a transparent rotating glass cube which is filled with modern office furniture and many boxes. The background behind the cube is created by the video projections - at the back of the scene, showing us either the Statue of Liberty or the views of Alabama taking us at the very end somewhere to the top of the business center of New York. We understand that this cube which at first symbolized the amazing magic box called America. The scenery narrows to an ordinary office in a skyscraper, one of many. The stage designer Es Devlin was also nominated for Olivier Award for this phenomenal work.
Two main colors (black, white) are in play and the whole palette of their combinations work in the play. The wall backdrop is monochrome, the costumes of the protagonists are strict: there are black frock coats of the mid-19th century. Even the flowers in the vase are minimalistic: white tulips. If one looks to the right bottom corner of the stage he will find the fourth character though: Candida Caldicott. She is the musical director of the performance. Concurrently she is a pianist-tapper (live pianist) who maintains the atmosphere of the performance throughout the entire action.
There is the fifth element though: the creators don’t talk about it as they talk about the musical component of the production, but it is there and it plays an equally significant role in the play: it is the finest, the subtlest humor with which the story is told. I found myself laughing constantly. “Who knew that Potato knows how to think” and what charming ladies come from Russell Beale and Adam Godley: each lady is with her own character and her own appearance. Although on the stage there is the same man in a tailcoat in front of us and sometimes even with a beard we see multiple characters... "We must change the sign" sounds already simbolically with each new milestone in the history of the company. It seems to be trifle but thanks to such trifles we become attached to the characters limitlessly.
As I already said the action often goes into the format of the story telling from a narrator: “He took a deep breath, took his suitcase and quickly went despite the fact that he did not know where to go... " The Lehman Brothers Trilogy is unique as it will not be interesting only to the theater lovers but to those who are far from the theater. The harsh world of bigwigs comes to life in front of our eyes: there is no pathos or hidden morality in history. We are simply given the opportunity to see how this happens, what big business is, how money make even bigger money and what sacrifices people do make this American dream stay alive.
The story starts with three brothers (“Heads”, “Hands” and “Potatoes”), they make decisions together, and they act like one entity. When the eldest brother leaves they mourn for weeks as their ancestors bequeathed. When the last of the brothers left the family compromised on mornings that went for hours only. When Philip Lehman (the most significant of the generation of the Lehman children) left, no one was mourning. The same thing happened with their heritage: built with a burning heart, albeit in the concept of “money makes money”, the empire fell apart like dust. There was nobody and nothing left of those people who came to catch that American Dream.
We define the moral of the story ourselves. Perhaps this is the main magic of the theater: for almost four hours of the breathtaking experiences these people are no longer pages from the boring school textbook on American history but sometimes lively and touching destiny of real people.
DORA NEW
website
review by Nicole Stenton
Dore and the Lost City of Gold
Having never seen an episode of Dora the Explorer I wasn’t expecting much more than a light-hearted adventure movie with a Spanglish speaking young girl. Surprisingly there wasn’t much Spanish spoken and Dora was a teenager in high school, however it is a movie the whole family can enjoy. The movie had a similar vibe to Jumanji only it didn’t provide the same nail biting entertainment.
This movie starts in a city, high school setting and quickly moves into the jungle scenery. While the storyline is rather predictable you do grow to like the characters, especially Dora’s sidekick, Boots the monkey. He keeps you smiling throughout the movie and for me was the star of the show. Each character played their role well, however there was a lack of chemistry between the characters, and other than Dora it was a little hard to relate to the others on her quest.
The story provided some good laughs and at times kept you guessing about what would happen next. One scene in particular with some over-sized large pink flowers really had the whole cinema laughing.
I watched the movie with three excited, children all who said they thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It had their attention from start to finish which is always a win for any parent. It wasn’t a movie I’d recommend for anyone that didn’t have a child under 10 accompanying them.
website
review by Nicole Stenton
Dore and the Lost City of Gold
Having never seen an episode of Dora the Explorer I wasn’t expecting much more than a light-hearted adventure movie with a Spanglish speaking young girl. Surprisingly there wasn’t much Spanish spoken and Dora was a teenager in high school, however it is a movie the whole family can enjoy. The movie had a similar vibe to Jumanji only it didn’t provide the same nail biting entertainment.
This movie starts in a city, high school setting and quickly moves into the jungle scenery. While the storyline is rather predictable you do grow to like the characters, especially Dora’s sidekick, Boots the monkey. He keeps you smiling throughout the movie and for me was the star of the show. Each character played their role well, however there was a lack of chemistry between the characters, and other than Dora it was a little hard to relate to the others on her quest.
The story provided some good laughs and at times kept you guessing about what would happen next. One scene in particular with some over-sized large pink flowers really had the whole cinema laughing.
I watched the movie with three excited, children all who said they thoroughly enjoyed the movie. It had their attention from start to finish which is always a win for any parent. It wasn’t a movie I’d recommend for anyone that didn’t have a child under 10 accompanying them.
AMAZING GRACE NEW
website
RATE: 8/10
Honestly I hardly knew what to write about this film so I though the history of it was quite fascinating as I read lots of material on its creation and decided to share it with our readers.
In 1972 the famous film director Sydney Pollack spent two days in the church of the Watts district in Los Angeles where Aretha Franklin recorded her outstanding gospel album. The events were filmed in details but the sound was forgotten to get synchronized. Nowadays after 43 years the film is finally ready for screening. It was done following the request of Franklin.
If your collection has an original record of Aretha Franklin’s legendary live album “Amazing Grace” in 1972 which was by the way double platinum ( she was the best-selling singer as well as the best-selling LP in gospel history) please pay good attention to the accompanying text. It contains a phrase that soon promises us the release of the film by Sydney Pollack (as it is written) based on the album.
However the 73-year-old Franklin filed a lawsuit to prevent him from showing the film and so far she has been successful.
Amazing Grace is a superb 87 minute documentary based on the footage where Franklin recorded her album with the choir and many spectator in the church. According to the plan, premieres were supposed to take place at the Telluride festival and at the Toronto festival. However at the one of the event the screening was banned and it was the second time that the singer managed to prevent the picture from showing.
The squabble that accompanies the film is not the only reason Warner Bros could not release it for nearly half a century. The most important was that in 1972 Pollack heavily screwed it all up. The promising 38-year-old director, who has just received his first Academy Award nomination (Hunted Horses Are Shot, Isn't It?) simply didn’t capture the crackers to synchronize the sound eventually making the first ever silent musical documentary.
Nobody remembers who came up with the idea of recording Franklin's voice on film but the legendary rock producer Joe Boyd who is well known for working with Pink Floyd and Nick Drake and who was appointed a head of the Warner Bros music department in late 1970 was in charge of the process. Shortly before this the company merged the studio and Warner Brothers Records which owned Atlantic Records which recorded the album for Franklin... It was decided to sell movie tickets and music records in a single bundle. Now 73 years old Boyd calls that decision "the dawn of the era of synergy"
The time in question can be safely called "the golden era of rock documentary". In 1970 alone Woodstock, Gimme Shelter and Elvis: How It Was docos were released. Boyd had already begun to select a team of well-established cameramen to could shoot the Franklin movie but Ted Ashley who was the head of Warner Brothers Pictures decided to do otherwise. “Ted called me and said he has good news” - in Boyd's words. “He had dinner with Sidney Pollack the night before, and now it is Sydney who will make the film with Aretha” ‘But Ted,” I said, “has he ever made a live musical film?” It actually needs some skills ’. To which he replied: ‘What are you talking about? This is Sydney Pollack! ’”
Pollack arrived at the New Bethel Baptist Church in Los Angeles on January 13 1972 with a team of sound engineers and film experts who had five 16 mm cameras. He began filming Franklin and her choir who sang all sorts of gospels from “Here is our friend Jesus” to “Wholly Holy” by Marvin Gay. You can imagine a young director dressed in a fashionable velveteen with whiskers that look like sponges for washing dishes “Brillo” gesturing to give directions to the film crew moving back and forth among specially invited parishioners. If you could take a closer look you can find buzzers to the back of the church having a ball to the music of Mick Jagger and Charlie Watts (they will soon record “Exile on Main Street” which was the most gospel-oriented album of the Rolling Stones buy the way). “I've seen Aretha at concerts many times” says Jagger in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter. “But it was my first time seeing her performing at the church.” It was an exciting, unique event. ”
While filming Franklin Pollack spent two days in the Watts area. The plan was then to synchronize the image with sound and his entire 20-hour film turned out to be practically useless as thre was no indications for each recording in the film frame. “The disappointment was hellish,” William Steinckamp recalled, a longtime editor of Pollack. - The film looked like one big puzzle no one was able to solve. Our team tried to at least do something with it but in the end everyone gave up. ” The director of the choir, who was then speaking in the church was called for help. He tried to decipher the recording by reading on the lips of the participants but after a few months he managed to correlate with the sound only 150 minutes of film material. Not a single song has been wholly put together. All dates were out in June 1972 when the album “Amazing Grace” went on sale and sold in millions of copies without any “synergy”. In August Warner Bros finally stopped the production of the film and it was shelved.
Pollack moved on to his next project “What We Were” now working with another diva Barbara Streisand. His film with Aretha collected the dust for decades lying in tin boxes. However the director never abandoned the idea to complete what he started. “Every seven to eight years,” Steinkamp recalls, “I asked him:‘ Hey, what about that thing about Aretha Franklin? ’.” and he replied: ‘Yes, everything is still there where it was, damn it!’. He sat in his office, watched all these videotapes without sound and dreamed of working on it again. He always wanted to finish this film but he was always too busy taking things off like Tutsi and Firms and put off the Amazing Grace again”
Then another man jooined on stage here, the producer Alan Elliot who was intrigued by the legend of the lost film with Aretha Franklin since her time as an intern at Atlantic Records in the early 90's. He once touched on this topic in a conversation with his Atlantic boss, Jerry Wexler (who had been involved in producing the album “Amazing Grace’ ”). Wexler and two of his mutual friends: songwriters Alan and Marilyn Bergman organized a meeting of Elliot and Pollock in 2007. During the year they exchanged calls trying to find the way to revive the "Franklin project." and then Pollack’s health suddenly worsened. “I knew Sydney had an incurable form of cancer,” recalls Elliot. “So I called and started by how sorry I was to find out that he was sick.” ‘I’m not sick, I am f**** dying’, he replied. He had the ability to go straight to the core of the matter. ‘You know this stuff even better than me. So I will go to Warner Bros. and I’ll see if they give you the opportunity to finish this film ’.”
Elliot took these words seriously: he was really determined to complete Pollack's work. He even mortgaged his house to buy from Warner Bros the footage (Ari Emanuel from WME agency, with whom they once worked together on one burnt-out Internet project put in a good word for it). Finally two years after the death of Pollack in 2008 working with specialists from the Deluxe cinema laboratory who carefully examined audio and video material using computers Elliot managed to synchronize the image and the sound. In 2010 the first preview was held and even the trailer was created because next year Elliot planned to release “Amazing Grace” on the big screens but then another failure occurred: Franklin filed a lawsuit against Elliot for using her image without proper permission.
Franklin refused to explain why she did not like the idea of releasing the film despite the fact that in an interview with The Detroit Free Press she recently stated that she watched it and liked it. Elliot was in an uncomfortable position. He managed to find contracts signed in 1972 by all participants in the project except and oddly enough the main character. As a result he was forced to accept the claim pledging not to show the film without Franklin’s permission. However the singer’s contract suddenly showed up in Warner Bros. It turned out that Elliot could not find it before since it was signed not in 1972, but in 1969. Under its terms all rights to the material recorded in the church of the Watts district belonged to the film studio and recording studio (and now, as Elliot is sure , to him as the new owner).
Franklin's lawyer Arnold Reed began to speculate on the possibility of filing a new lawsuit in order to ban the screening of the film in Telluride and Toronto. “Once we decide to sue Alan Elliot will not be able to show this film even in his garage” the lawyer said in an interview with THR insisting that releasing the film without Franklin’s permission and without paying her compensation is an “act of theft”. Last week the singer turned to another firm Detroit Dykema Gossett for legal assistance. As a result the ban the display of "Amazing Graces" in Telluride and Toronto was filed in Colorado.
“I understand that she’s used to getting a lot of money for participating in the promotion of such projects,” says Elliot who continues to believe that Franklin will come to her senses. “I hope she changes her mind at some point. I want only one thing: to do the right thing towards her”.
website
RATE: 8/10
Honestly I hardly knew what to write about this film so I though the history of it was quite fascinating as I read lots of material on its creation and decided to share it with our readers.
In 1972 the famous film director Sydney Pollack spent two days in the church of the Watts district in Los Angeles where Aretha Franklin recorded her outstanding gospel album. The events were filmed in details but the sound was forgotten to get synchronized. Nowadays after 43 years the film is finally ready for screening. It was done following the request of Franklin.
If your collection has an original record of Aretha Franklin’s legendary live album “Amazing Grace” in 1972 which was by the way double platinum ( she was the best-selling singer as well as the best-selling LP in gospel history) please pay good attention to the accompanying text. It contains a phrase that soon promises us the release of the film by Sydney Pollack (as it is written) based on the album.
However the 73-year-old Franklin filed a lawsuit to prevent him from showing the film and so far she has been successful.
Amazing Grace is a superb 87 minute documentary based on the footage where Franklin recorded her album with the choir and many spectator in the church. According to the plan, premieres were supposed to take place at the Telluride festival and at the Toronto festival. However at the one of the event the screening was banned and it was the second time that the singer managed to prevent the picture from showing.
The squabble that accompanies the film is not the only reason Warner Bros could not release it for nearly half a century. The most important was that in 1972 Pollack heavily screwed it all up. The promising 38-year-old director, who has just received his first Academy Award nomination (Hunted Horses Are Shot, Isn't It?) simply didn’t capture the crackers to synchronize the sound eventually making the first ever silent musical documentary.
Nobody remembers who came up with the idea of recording Franklin's voice on film but the legendary rock producer Joe Boyd who is well known for working with Pink Floyd and Nick Drake and who was appointed a head of the Warner Bros music department in late 1970 was in charge of the process. Shortly before this the company merged the studio and Warner Brothers Records which owned Atlantic Records which recorded the album for Franklin... It was decided to sell movie tickets and music records in a single bundle. Now 73 years old Boyd calls that decision "the dawn of the era of synergy"
The time in question can be safely called "the golden era of rock documentary". In 1970 alone Woodstock, Gimme Shelter and Elvis: How It Was docos were released. Boyd had already begun to select a team of well-established cameramen to could shoot the Franklin movie but Ted Ashley who was the head of Warner Brothers Pictures decided to do otherwise. “Ted called me and said he has good news” - in Boyd's words. “He had dinner with Sidney Pollack the night before, and now it is Sydney who will make the film with Aretha” ‘But Ted,” I said, “has he ever made a live musical film?” It actually needs some skills ’. To which he replied: ‘What are you talking about? This is Sydney Pollack! ’”
Pollack arrived at the New Bethel Baptist Church in Los Angeles on January 13 1972 with a team of sound engineers and film experts who had five 16 mm cameras. He began filming Franklin and her choir who sang all sorts of gospels from “Here is our friend Jesus” to “Wholly Holy” by Marvin Gay. You can imagine a young director dressed in a fashionable velveteen with whiskers that look like sponges for washing dishes “Brillo” gesturing to give directions to the film crew moving back and forth among specially invited parishioners. If you could take a closer look you can find buzzers to the back of the church having a ball to the music of Mick Jagger and Charlie Watts (they will soon record “Exile on Main Street” which was the most gospel-oriented album of the Rolling Stones buy the way). “I've seen Aretha at concerts many times” says Jagger in an interview with The Hollywood Reporter. “But it was my first time seeing her performing at the church.” It was an exciting, unique event. ”
While filming Franklin Pollack spent two days in the Watts area. The plan was then to synchronize the image with sound and his entire 20-hour film turned out to be practically useless as thre was no indications for each recording in the film frame. “The disappointment was hellish,” William Steinckamp recalled, a longtime editor of Pollack. - The film looked like one big puzzle no one was able to solve. Our team tried to at least do something with it but in the end everyone gave up. ” The director of the choir, who was then speaking in the church was called for help. He tried to decipher the recording by reading on the lips of the participants but after a few months he managed to correlate with the sound only 150 minutes of film material. Not a single song has been wholly put together. All dates were out in June 1972 when the album “Amazing Grace” went on sale and sold in millions of copies without any “synergy”. In August Warner Bros finally stopped the production of the film and it was shelved.
Pollack moved on to his next project “What We Were” now working with another diva Barbara Streisand. His film with Aretha collected the dust for decades lying in tin boxes. However the director never abandoned the idea to complete what he started. “Every seven to eight years,” Steinkamp recalls, “I asked him:‘ Hey, what about that thing about Aretha Franklin? ’.” and he replied: ‘Yes, everything is still there where it was, damn it!’. He sat in his office, watched all these videotapes without sound and dreamed of working on it again. He always wanted to finish this film but he was always too busy taking things off like Tutsi and Firms and put off the Amazing Grace again”
Then another man jooined on stage here, the producer Alan Elliot who was intrigued by the legend of the lost film with Aretha Franklin since her time as an intern at Atlantic Records in the early 90's. He once touched on this topic in a conversation with his Atlantic boss, Jerry Wexler (who had been involved in producing the album “Amazing Grace’ ”). Wexler and two of his mutual friends: songwriters Alan and Marilyn Bergman organized a meeting of Elliot and Pollock in 2007. During the year they exchanged calls trying to find the way to revive the "Franklin project." and then Pollack’s health suddenly worsened. “I knew Sydney had an incurable form of cancer,” recalls Elliot. “So I called and started by how sorry I was to find out that he was sick.” ‘I’m not sick, I am f**** dying’, he replied. He had the ability to go straight to the core of the matter. ‘You know this stuff even better than me. So I will go to Warner Bros. and I’ll see if they give you the opportunity to finish this film ’.”
Elliot took these words seriously: he was really determined to complete Pollack's work. He even mortgaged his house to buy from Warner Bros the footage (Ari Emanuel from WME agency, with whom they once worked together on one burnt-out Internet project put in a good word for it). Finally two years after the death of Pollack in 2008 working with specialists from the Deluxe cinema laboratory who carefully examined audio and video material using computers Elliot managed to synchronize the image and the sound. In 2010 the first preview was held and even the trailer was created because next year Elliot planned to release “Amazing Grace” on the big screens but then another failure occurred: Franklin filed a lawsuit against Elliot for using her image without proper permission.
Franklin refused to explain why she did not like the idea of releasing the film despite the fact that in an interview with The Detroit Free Press she recently stated that she watched it and liked it. Elliot was in an uncomfortable position. He managed to find contracts signed in 1972 by all participants in the project except and oddly enough the main character. As a result he was forced to accept the claim pledging not to show the film without Franklin’s permission. However the singer’s contract suddenly showed up in Warner Bros. It turned out that Elliot could not find it before since it was signed not in 1972, but in 1969. Under its terms all rights to the material recorded in the church of the Watts district belonged to the film studio and recording studio (and now, as Elliot is sure , to him as the new owner).
Franklin's lawyer Arnold Reed began to speculate on the possibility of filing a new lawsuit in order to ban the screening of the film in Telluride and Toronto. “Once we decide to sue Alan Elliot will not be able to show this film even in his garage” the lawyer said in an interview with THR insisting that releasing the film without Franklin’s permission and without paying her compensation is an “act of theft”. Last week the singer turned to another firm Detroit Dykema Gossett for legal assistance. As a result the ban the display of "Amazing Graces" in Telluride and Toronto was filed in Colorado.
“I understand that she’s used to getting a lot of money for participating in the promotion of such projects,” says Elliot who continues to believe that Franklin will come to her senses. “I hope she changes her mind at some point. I want only one thing: to do the right thing towards her”.
FREAKS NEW
website
review by Roslynne Garwood-Webb
Freaks
This film is in no rush to let you into the ‘real’ world of 7 year old Chloe who is confined to the inside of her house under strict instruction from her father.
At the outset I had a very uncomfortable feeling about the reasons as to why Chloe was forced to stay inside and view the outside world from a few gaps in the blinds, where she sadly had to watch other children laughing and playing and visiting the ice cream truck which seemed to frequently park at the end of her street playing its melancholic music.
As the film progresses I begin to understand that we are being told the story at a child's pace, through the eyes of Chloe, which makes for a very frustrating and eerie ride.
The Ultimate premise of this film is that it is a story about a 7 year old girl who is ordered to never leave the house by her father, because there are bad people outside who want to hurt her. It takes sometime until we learn what those dangers are, but when you do, the story takes on a whole different life of its own. Suddenly you are thrown into the realm of a very thought provoking Sci Fi movie which is masterfully told through the eyes of a child. Lexie Kolker who plays Chloe gives an amazing performance in her first major leading role, supported by Emile Hirsch.
3/5 stars
website
review by Roslynne Garwood-Webb
Freaks
This film is in no rush to let you into the ‘real’ world of 7 year old Chloe who is confined to the inside of her house under strict instruction from her father.
At the outset I had a very uncomfortable feeling about the reasons as to why Chloe was forced to stay inside and view the outside world from a few gaps in the blinds, where she sadly had to watch other children laughing and playing and visiting the ice cream truck which seemed to frequently park at the end of her street playing its melancholic music.
As the film progresses I begin to understand that we are being told the story at a child's pace, through the eyes of Chloe, which makes for a very frustrating and eerie ride.
The Ultimate premise of this film is that it is a story about a 7 year old girl who is ordered to never leave the house by her father, because there are bad people outside who want to hurt her. It takes sometime until we learn what those dangers are, but when you do, the story takes on a whole different life of its own. Suddenly you are thrown into the realm of a very thought provoking Sci Fi movie which is masterfully told through the eyes of a child. Lexie Kolker who plays Chloe gives an amazing performance in her first major leading role, supported by Emile Hirsch.
3/5 stars
THE AUSTRALIAN DREAM NEW
website
review by Bruanna Reynolds
REVIEW: The Australian Dream
By Bryanna Reynolds
In this truly beautiful and groundbreaking Australian sporting documentary we see into the world of Adam Goodes. If there was ever a history making film you should see its this one. The audience are taken behind the scenes and into the life and times of legendary and history breaking AFL footballer and Australian of the Year, Adam Goodes.
This documentary is a tale of hope, history and an in-depth look at racism and its effect in this country. If you are looking for a film that is bound to change your views and philosophies on football and this country then this is a must see. Having worked in sports broadcast for 4 years with a network in Melbourne there was so much I learnt from this film that I simply never thought about. It truly opened my mind and I hope it will open yours too.
Starring Adam Goodes the legendary footballer, Brownlow medalist and Australian of the year recipient, Goodes shares his own experiences of being Aboriginal and the effects of racism in the sporting industry. His story is one you will want to hear and is so beautifully and cinematically told.
Along with Goodes there are interviews from sporting talent such as Michael O'Loughlin, Nova Peris, Gilbert McAdam, Nathan Buckley, Paul Roos and Eddie MacGuire to name a few. The best part about the film is that they truly capture the spirit of sporting history in the making.
I would recommend this film to anyone who is familiar with the history of sports in particularly the AFL in Australia. Although it would be as easy to understand the concept and narrative, even if you are not familiar with the sporting landscape of the great game. I always feel like if you leave a cinema having had your life changed from viewing a film, then the film has had a positive impact on your life. This is definitely one of those films.
Make sure to see it on the big screen whilst in the cinema now. This is a film not to be missed and you will walk away a changed person both in mind and spirit.
website
review by Bruanna Reynolds
REVIEW: The Australian Dream
By Bryanna Reynolds
In this truly beautiful and groundbreaking Australian sporting documentary we see into the world of Adam Goodes. If there was ever a history making film you should see its this one. The audience are taken behind the scenes and into the life and times of legendary and history breaking AFL footballer and Australian of the Year, Adam Goodes.
This documentary is a tale of hope, history and an in-depth look at racism and its effect in this country. If you are looking for a film that is bound to change your views and philosophies on football and this country then this is a must see. Having worked in sports broadcast for 4 years with a network in Melbourne there was so much I learnt from this film that I simply never thought about. It truly opened my mind and I hope it will open yours too.
Starring Adam Goodes the legendary footballer, Brownlow medalist and Australian of the year recipient, Goodes shares his own experiences of being Aboriginal and the effects of racism in the sporting industry. His story is one you will want to hear and is so beautifully and cinematically told.
Along with Goodes there are interviews from sporting talent such as Michael O'Loughlin, Nova Peris, Gilbert McAdam, Nathan Buckley, Paul Roos and Eddie MacGuire to name a few. The best part about the film is that they truly capture the spirit of sporting history in the making.
I would recommend this film to anyone who is familiar with the history of sports in particularly the AFL in Australia. Although it would be as easy to understand the concept and narrative, even if you are not familiar with the sporting landscape of the great game. I always feel like if you leave a cinema having had your life changed from viewing a film, then the film has had a positive impact on your life. This is definitely one of those films.
Make sure to see it on the big screen whilst in the cinema now. This is a film not to be missed and you will walk away a changed person both in mind and spirit.
DRAGGED ACROSS CONCRETE
website
review by Katherine Kelly
Dragged across Concrete
Dragged across concrete a 158-minute crime noir movie written and directed by S. Craig Zahler of Bone Tomahawk and Brawl in Cell Block 99 fame features including Mel Gibson and Vince Vaughn.
The opening scene portrays a surly 60-something Brett Ridgemen (Mel Gibson) outside a dwelling during a drug raid. Ridgeman and his sidekick Anthony Lurasetti (Vince Vaughn) employ violent and demeaning methods in the raid, which were filmed by a neighbour. Their chief subsequently suspends them without pay.
We are then introduced to ex con Henry Johns (Tory Kittles). On returning home from a jail stint he discovers his mother working as a prostitute to make ends meet in caring for herself and Henry’s disabled but bright younger brother.
Ridgeman’s domestic situation is far from ideal. He lives in a poor African American neighbourhood with his chronically ill ex-cop wife where youths repeatedly harass their daughter. Ridgeman has failed to rise up in the policing ranks due to his rough handling of suspects and criminals – therefore the poor neighbourhood.
A suspended, ageing cop with an invalid wife unable to work and an African American ex con are left to contemplate on how they will make a living in their present circumstances.
The methods employed in making that living lead them through many dark and brutally graphic paths resulting in an unexpected twist.
Katherine Kelly
website
review by Katherine Kelly
Dragged across Concrete
Dragged across concrete a 158-minute crime noir movie written and directed by S. Craig Zahler of Bone Tomahawk and Brawl in Cell Block 99 fame features including Mel Gibson and Vince Vaughn.
The opening scene portrays a surly 60-something Brett Ridgemen (Mel Gibson) outside a dwelling during a drug raid. Ridgeman and his sidekick Anthony Lurasetti (Vince Vaughn) employ violent and demeaning methods in the raid, which were filmed by a neighbour. Their chief subsequently suspends them without pay.
We are then introduced to ex con Henry Johns (Tory Kittles). On returning home from a jail stint he discovers his mother working as a prostitute to make ends meet in caring for herself and Henry’s disabled but bright younger brother.
Ridgeman’s domestic situation is far from ideal. He lives in a poor African American neighbourhood with his chronically ill ex-cop wife where youths repeatedly harass their daughter. Ridgeman has failed to rise up in the policing ranks due to his rough handling of suspects and criminals – therefore the poor neighbourhood.
A suspended, ageing cop with an invalid wife unable to work and an African American ex con are left to contemplate on how they will make a living in their present circumstances.
The methods employed in making that living lead them through many dark and brutally graphic paths resulting in an unexpected twist.
Katherine Kelly
INDIAN FILM FESTIVAL MELBOURNE 2019
OPENING NIGHT: AWARDS NIGHT
website
coverage: Amit Singh
Indian Film Festival is in its 10th year from inception in 2010.
This year the week long event was opened by Sharukh Khan- the King of Bollywood. He was accompanied by many other Bollywood royalties such as Karan Johar, zoya Akhtar, Arjun Kapoor, Malaika Arora Tabu, Vijay Setupathi and his crew and many more.
Sharukh was awarded a doctorate at Latrobe University for his contribution to world cinema. He and his son recently gave their voices for a character in the movie Lion King. Latrobe has announced a scholarship $200,000 for women in India aspiring to do a PHD.
Indian diaspora in Australia is becoming increasingly significant with over 280,000 Indians in Victoria and over 700,000 Indians around Australia. Indian diaspora has has made a significant contribution to the housing market in Australia with 33% of new homes being purchased by Indians as compared to 23% by Australians. Indian culture, religions, food, festivals and Bollywood are now an integral part of Australia bringing diversity, richness, culture, traditions, many languages and flavours of India to Australia.
This is fostering closer relationships between the two countries in trade and commerce too. Events such as IFFM will continue to do so symbolising true friendship between the two countries.
Thank you to Natasha Marchev and Miranda Brown .
From Amit singh Brand Ambassador of Bohemian Rhapsody Club and Magazine
Marquis Fashion Magazine
OPENING NIGHT: AWARDS NIGHT
website
coverage: Amit Singh
Indian Film Festival is in its 10th year from inception in 2010.
This year the week long event was opened by Sharukh Khan- the King of Bollywood. He was accompanied by many other Bollywood royalties such as Karan Johar, zoya Akhtar, Arjun Kapoor, Malaika Arora Tabu, Vijay Setupathi and his crew and many more.
Sharukh was awarded a doctorate at Latrobe University for his contribution to world cinema. He and his son recently gave their voices for a character in the movie Lion King. Latrobe has announced a scholarship $200,000 for women in India aspiring to do a PHD.
Indian diaspora in Australia is becoming increasingly significant with over 280,000 Indians in Victoria and over 700,000 Indians around Australia. Indian diaspora has has made a significant contribution to the housing market in Australia with 33% of new homes being purchased by Indians as compared to 23% by Australians. Indian culture, religions, food, festivals and Bollywood are now an integral part of Australia bringing diversity, richness, culture, traditions, many languages and flavours of India to Australia.
This is fostering closer relationships between the two countries in trade and commerce too. Events such as IFFM will continue to do so symbolising true friendship between the two countries.
Thank you to Natasha Marchev and Miranda Brown .
From Amit singh Brand Ambassador of Bohemian Rhapsody Club and Magazine
Marquis Fashion Magazine
MIDSOMMAR
website
RATE: 5/10
I like writing about good movies. Writing about something bad, or more like something that does not teach you anything or does not resonate as an art work in your soul is a real pain for me personally. Let's try though there is nothing I want to tell the world here about this film.
I was curious to watch this film as I heard the discussions of our media critics once at the screening. It sounded like a thriller. I wanted to check out this pie that turned out to be a pie with a filling. Just to note that the filing was not that tasty to say the least.
From the very beginning, the picture immerses you in a creepy atmosphere thanks to howls on the background and the coldness of it. The start feels more like an immature film captured. The acting is awful and quite fake as if the actors do not understand what is required from them. The acting is soulless. The group of your men and a girl travel to Sweden to experience some "community". The mysterious death of the sister of the main character together with the parents of both looks like a good but artificial hook that does not even engage us (the girl doe snot seem very much frustrated about the loos of three family members in one night). I realised that I did not empathise or somehow connect with the characters at all. Why should I suddenly be interested in the fate of this wooden hysteria... yes, the situation with the death of someone's parents and sister is more than unclear! In general, all the characters are some kind of cardboard , frozen. Dialogues look scanty and pointless. There is no development taking place anyhow.
For me the plot and the actor have always been and will be the main ones. If there is none there is no film. Everything is somehow sad with this and uninteresting. This seems like a big problem! But I'm not a huge horror lover. I am perhaps missing something very important and horrible in my own life. I watched good and terrific thrillers before though. They are lovely. They are engaging etc etc... The storytelling in Midsommar is so boring that was the first film I stood up 40 minutes before it finished and walked out from the cinema. The actions are strange - yes. But they are more disgusting and boring rather than horrifying.
It was the worse I have seen in many years.
Just keep in mind this: if you watch it you can not un-watch it and this is the saddest part - the film will stay with you. You can not vomit it out nor you can spill it out... It is an art house in its worst and most painful expression.
Just to end the horror: of writing about he horror (in both meaning of this word):
- Hi girl, and where do you want me to take these from here?
- To the small branch of the greenhouse ...
- Are you really making cacti out of people?
- Only from plyukans
- But ours are not plyukans, ours are hanuids.
- It does not matter…
End of story - you got me!
website
RATE: 5/10
I like writing about good movies. Writing about something bad, or more like something that does not teach you anything or does not resonate as an art work in your soul is a real pain for me personally. Let's try though there is nothing I want to tell the world here about this film.
I was curious to watch this film as I heard the discussions of our media critics once at the screening. It sounded like a thriller. I wanted to check out this pie that turned out to be a pie with a filling. Just to note that the filing was not that tasty to say the least.
From the very beginning, the picture immerses you in a creepy atmosphere thanks to howls on the background and the coldness of it. The start feels more like an immature film captured. The acting is awful and quite fake as if the actors do not understand what is required from them. The acting is soulless. The group of your men and a girl travel to Sweden to experience some "community". The mysterious death of the sister of the main character together with the parents of both looks like a good but artificial hook that does not even engage us (the girl doe snot seem very much frustrated about the loos of three family members in one night). I realised that I did not empathise or somehow connect with the characters at all. Why should I suddenly be interested in the fate of this wooden hysteria... yes, the situation with the death of someone's parents and sister is more than unclear! In general, all the characters are some kind of cardboard , frozen. Dialogues look scanty and pointless. There is no development taking place anyhow.
For me the plot and the actor have always been and will be the main ones. If there is none there is no film. Everything is somehow sad with this and uninteresting. This seems like a big problem! But I'm not a huge horror lover. I am perhaps missing something very important and horrible in my own life. I watched good and terrific thrillers before though. They are lovely. They are engaging etc etc... The storytelling in Midsommar is so boring that was the first film I stood up 40 minutes before it finished and walked out from the cinema. The actions are strange - yes. But they are more disgusting and boring rather than horrifying.
It was the worse I have seen in many years.
Just keep in mind this: if you watch it you can not un-watch it and this is the saddest part - the film will stay with you. You can not vomit it out nor you can spill it out... It is an art house in its worst and most painful expression.
Just to end the horror: of writing about he horror (in both meaning of this word):
- Hi girl, and where do you want me to take these from here?
- To the small branch of the greenhouse ...
- Are you really making cacti out of people?
- Only from plyukans
- But ours are not plyukans, ours are hanuids.
- It does not matter…
End of story - you got me!
DOGMAN FILM TO PAY ATTENTION AT
website
RATE: 10/10
I have to admit that of all the modern European directors who are currently in action, few embed locations in the narrative more eloquently than Matteo Garrone. It is Garrone who is the first example among "directors making films about what is most interesting to them personally." Apparently when it becomes fascinating for the director it becomes interesting for the spectators as they feel the love the director injects in his picture. The director is interested in the back skirts, almost shadowed life of modern Italy. His latest film (and possibly the best) called Dogman takes place under the gray skies of an almost forgotten and trashed coastal village north of Naples. The semi-abandoned urban landscape is here in front of us, it scares us leaving s almost naked in our feelings. We can say that a starting point for the plot goes very optimistic. We can see the local residents, some poor, some rich in the light of faded neorealism. It is Garrone’s absolute realism, cultivated by him in Gomorrah film. where he focuses on the unbearable pain of the “little man” who desperately seeks a decent life in a modern but rotten world.
So the "little man" very skinny and almost sick looking named Marcello is a timid dog hairdresser, masseur, watcher, walker, groomer and who knows what somewhere in the Italian outback as I mentioned before. It looks like a dead rabbit skin , the place he lives in: both his flat and his workshop as well as the surrounding area. The settlement consists entirely of soulless concrete buildings, abandoned children entertainment parks, full of rain ponds, dirty and unsafe. Many shops are closed due to poverty on deserted streets. Marcello has a big heart: he is loved by both dogs, his daughter and his next door traders. This "little man" is able to tame even a pit bull who does not enjoy washing his back. His little daughter visits him once in a while; he must be divorced as his ex-wife brings her in to her father and takes her back to her house. His only "friend" is the local thug Simone, who communicates with Marcello. Simone looks more like a pit bull than like a human. He speaks and behaves worse than the most evil dog too. Marcello delivers drugs to Simone, helps him out to solve his problems and gets him out of troubles. Simone in return only scares and humiliates an unfortunate dog groomer, threatens the local community and uses drugs in front of Marcello's daughter despite all Marcello's calls to prevent such incidents. The endless faith in justice with Dogman leads to a terrible fate - a real hell in reality. We suddenly realise what is it to be a Christ in the modern time, what it feels to be human and be nice to everyone and how it turns out if you want to please everyone around you. It is a good lesson for all of us who love to be kind.
The film seems to be joggling between opposites: dizzying helpfulness and kindness of Marcello and his addiction to drugs. It feels like a finest line between the evil and the kind, the love and hate. We can not understand if we should like Marcello or hate him for all he does. The way Marcello behaves with his daughter, his clients, his puppies and his friends on one side and the actions he performs with Simone are two polar actions. There is also a strong contrast between the two main characters of the film: Simone and Marcello. The rationality seems completely ironic in such a world especially considering the central character, Marcello. He is one miserable figure that can cause sympathy on one side and frustration on some of his actions o the other side. We feel like the director swings us on the huge playground swingers from one emotion to the next and totally opposite one. We love and hate Marcello as we see ourselves in him. Nevertheless Marcello is not a ridiculous idiot at all: he plans his actions, he reacts, he experiences and he reflects. The result of his mental torment is as unpredictable at the end as a explosion of the atomic bomb. He challenges his image as a “book-reader” in order to eventually become someone more complex and ultimately more real. The quiet man turning into a monster character.
Marcello’s relationship with other characters and no matter how strange it is and primarily with dogs is the thread that connects Dogman-Marcello together. Interestingly that the climax events in his relationship with Simone is also to some extent inspired by Marcello's experience that he gained working with animals. The relationship between Marcello and Simone in this case are still the relationship between two men while Simone treats his mother offensively and Marcello’s love for his daughter is desperate, genuine and comprehensive. The characters are comprehensively and well developed, which raises the stakes for the film and for director's work of course.
Complex in its psychology game Dogman film is built on acting. The lead actor Marcello projects warmth and humanity. Simone in return performed by Edoardo Pesce is one inhuman and terrible monster, He is a creature that does not know restraint even in a dead end cage and tries to escape in any possible way. he is an animal-human that belongs to jail. I believe the main idea in Dogman is our relations with fear, how it affects film )and our own) personalities in different ways. All our life is based on the emotions of love and fear. We act from these base emotions. Being locked in the dog's cage Simone is afraid like an animal. Marcello is simply meek and broken when Simone talks with him and scares him to kill him.
Garrone maintains quite a strong pace in the first two acts, we can notice that closer to the end suddenly looses its overwhelming with events rhythm and slows down somehow. It also hard not to notice that the difference between border between comedy and drama is almost the same as the difference between evil and good. The last 10 minutes of the film are almost silent, somehow ironic but it all falls in perfectly into place to end up the story that has more questions than answers, the story of Dogman.
Lighting and camera work play an important role in creating a certain environment in the film. The fell is both" real and phantasmagoric. Cinematography carefully describes the extreme desolation in gray colors, they add to the mood of uncertainty and sadness. The characters that inhabit this strange and isolated world are also depressingly real. I believe Dogman will be received by the viewers as a powerful social commentary on the poor layers of modern Italy but the film is of course much much more to this.
Using a minimal background (both in terms of scenery and the local world, as the inner experiences of the characters), Garrone shot an amazing picture from the visual and emotional side. In addition he also built a grotesque and rather surreal story. The plot is quite believable but at the same time it is so unusual. Garrone showed us the tragedy in its ancient Greek sense and understanding of tragedy as a genre. He also explores the metaphor of the “inner animal” up to the very end of the film. The title “Dogman” refers not only to the name of Marcello’s store, but also relates to the transformation of this clogged man into a big animal (a dog) himself. We know though that the dogs can be evil but they are innocent by nature.
website
RATE: 10/10
I have to admit that of all the modern European directors who are currently in action, few embed locations in the narrative more eloquently than Matteo Garrone. It is Garrone who is the first example among "directors making films about what is most interesting to them personally." Apparently when it becomes fascinating for the director it becomes interesting for the spectators as they feel the love the director injects in his picture. The director is interested in the back skirts, almost shadowed life of modern Italy. His latest film (and possibly the best) called Dogman takes place under the gray skies of an almost forgotten and trashed coastal village north of Naples. The semi-abandoned urban landscape is here in front of us, it scares us leaving s almost naked in our feelings. We can say that a starting point for the plot goes very optimistic. We can see the local residents, some poor, some rich in the light of faded neorealism. It is Garrone’s absolute realism, cultivated by him in Gomorrah film. where he focuses on the unbearable pain of the “little man” who desperately seeks a decent life in a modern but rotten world.
So the "little man" very skinny and almost sick looking named Marcello is a timid dog hairdresser, masseur, watcher, walker, groomer and who knows what somewhere in the Italian outback as I mentioned before. It looks like a dead rabbit skin , the place he lives in: both his flat and his workshop as well as the surrounding area. The settlement consists entirely of soulless concrete buildings, abandoned children entertainment parks, full of rain ponds, dirty and unsafe. Many shops are closed due to poverty on deserted streets. Marcello has a big heart: he is loved by both dogs, his daughter and his next door traders. This "little man" is able to tame even a pit bull who does not enjoy washing his back. His little daughter visits him once in a while; he must be divorced as his ex-wife brings her in to her father and takes her back to her house. His only "friend" is the local thug Simone, who communicates with Marcello. Simone looks more like a pit bull than like a human. He speaks and behaves worse than the most evil dog too. Marcello delivers drugs to Simone, helps him out to solve his problems and gets him out of troubles. Simone in return only scares and humiliates an unfortunate dog groomer, threatens the local community and uses drugs in front of Marcello's daughter despite all Marcello's calls to prevent such incidents. The endless faith in justice with Dogman leads to a terrible fate - a real hell in reality. We suddenly realise what is it to be a Christ in the modern time, what it feels to be human and be nice to everyone and how it turns out if you want to please everyone around you. It is a good lesson for all of us who love to be kind.
The film seems to be joggling between opposites: dizzying helpfulness and kindness of Marcello and his addiction to drugs. It feels like a finest line between the evil and the kind, the love and hate. We can not understand if we should like Marcello or hate him for all he does. The way Marcello behaves with his daughter, his clients, his puppies and his friends on one side and the actions he performs with Simone are two polar actions. There is also a strong contrast between the two main characters of the film: Simone and Marcello. The rationality seems completely ironic in such a world especially considering the central character, Marcello. He is one miserable figure that can cause sympathy on one side and frustration on some of his actions o the other side. We feel like the director swings us on the huge playground swingers from one emotion to the next and totally opposite one. We love and hate Marcello as we see ourselves in him. Nevertheless Marcello is not a ridiculous idiot at all: he plans his actions, he reacts, he experiences and he reflects. The result of his mental torment is as unpredictable at the end as a explosion of the atomic bomb. He challenges his image as a “book-reader” in order to eventually become someone more complex and ultimately more real. The quiet man turning into a monster character.
Marcello’s relationship with other characters and no matter how strange it is and primarily with dogs is the thread that connects Dogman-Marcello together. Interestingly that the climax events in his relationship with Simone is also to some extent inspired by Marcello's experience that he gained working with animals. The relationship between Marcello and Simone in this case are still the relationship between two men while Simone treats his mother offensively and Marcello’s love for his daughter is desperate, genuine and comprehensive. The characters are comprehensively and well developed, which raises the stakes for the film and for director's work of course.
Complex in its psychology game Dogman film is built on acting. The lead actor Marcello projects warmth and humanity. Simone in return performed by Edoardo Pesce is one inhuman and terrible monster, He is a creature that does not know restraint even in a dead end cage and tries to escape in any possible way. he is an animal-human that belongs to jail. I believe the main idea in Dogman is our relations with fear, how it affects film )and our own) personalities in different ways. All our life is based on the emotions of love and fear. We act from these base emotions. Being locked in the dog's cage Simone is afraid like an animal. Marcello is simply meek and broken when Simone talks with him and scares him to kill him.
Garrone maintains quite a strong pace in the first two acts, we can notice that closer to the end suddenly looses its overwhelming with events rhythm and slows down somehow. It also hard not to notice that the difference between border between comedy and drama is almost the same as the difference between evil and good. The last 10 minutes of the film are almost silent, somehow ironic but it all falls in perfectly into place to end up the story that has more questions than answers, the story of Dogman.
Lighting and camera work play an important role in creating a certain environment in the film. The fell is both" real and phantasmagoric. Cinematography carefully describes the extreme desolation in gray colors, they add to the mood of uncertainty and sadness. The characters that inhabit this strange and isolated world are also depressingly real. I believe Dogman will be received by the viewers as a powerful social commentary on the poor layers of modern Italy but the film is of course much much more to this.
Using a minimal background (both in terms of scenery and the local world, as the inner experiences of the characters), Garrone shot an amazing picture from the visual and emotional side. In addition he also built a grotesque and rather surreal story. The plot is quite believable but at the same time it is so unusual. Garrone showed us the tragedy in its ancient Greek sense and understanding of tragedy as a genre. He also explores the metaphor of the “inner animal” up to the very end of the film. The title “Dogman” refers not only to the name of Marcello’s store, but also relates to the transformation of this clogged man into a big animal (a dog) himself. We know though that the dogs can be evil but they are innocent by nature.
ONCE UPON A TINE IN HOLLYWOOD BEST MOVIE OF THE MONTH
website
RATE: 9.5/10
Quentin Tarantino no longer needs to prove anything to anyone: not to his friends or colleagues, not to his critics, nor to his audience. He can simply afford to make the films only for himself, the ones that he loves and admires, he can make them how he wants and whatever he wants. If you like the final result, well, then you are on the same wavelength with the director. If you do not like it, please do not blame me, you are not there yet. Tarantino’s ninth film, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, is a verbal and visual declaration of love for Hollywood and cinematography itself of the late 60s. That beautiful fairy tale that he presents to us ended on August 9, 1969.
If you do not know who was Sharon Tate or if you have not heard anything about the events of August 9, 1969, here we go (Wiki): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tate_murders . I recommend you read the story before you attend the film otherwise it would not make sense. You would simply waste your time simply without understanding who all these people are and why nothing happens during the first two hours of the film. You will think: there are some strange, almost random characters are involved in a very banal household incident, they walk, they watch movies, they go to work , the try to solve their minor and boring problems, they feed dogs, they cook dinners, they act in Hollywood movies etc etc. They also conduct meaningless conversations with each other and carelessly drive around Los Angeles in luxury and huge cars. You watch and you think: why all this takes place? Read the history then go to the film. You will have a double pleasure enjoying it and the events will all suddenly connect and will make sense: every small and insignificant scene and episode will make sense.
If Tate Murders is not some senseless words for you then you will see a completely different story from the very beginning. It is beautiful tale of the golden age of Hollywood with a good horror suspense in such intense and concentration that even your great Hitchcock would envy. If you know the story right you will watch Sharon Tate who first appearance in the film happened 8 month before the faithful events, you will already know how and when it will end. You will be waiting for the horror to take place and watching those everyday common scenes will make very painful. You will also understand who these cute hippie girls and boys are: they smile at the sun, they laugh, they misbehave and they are ready to sleep with anyone who seems to them somehow attractive. The name of the street on which the events take place will make you shiver. If you already know the events that are about to take place on that ill-fated day, then every detail will be significant in those two seemingly boring hours while at the start of the third hour of the film Tarantino will show you what he really thinks. He is a Hollywood Don Quiote after all.
When the third hour starts you will suddenly realise that the previous two hours were made by Tarantino to lull your vigilance, and then to masterfully arrange the film shoots and get the guns out that will surely kill someone in the final. This is the classic Tarantino after all.
However the director can allow himself not to rush in preparation for the finale. The film shows many episodes simply because Tarantino is madly in love with his 60s Hollywood: he loves westerns, he loves those stupid television series that he grew up with and much more. He loves big beautiful cars and fantastic neon lights of Los Angeles: he shows them to us with his childish admiration. He knows how to shoot them and he enjoys every frame they get into. He loves long actresses' legs, short skirts and cool colorful boots.
Most of the characters in th e film are real people. These directors, producers, actors and stylists really worked in Hollywood in the late 60s. They knew each other, they were partying together and they were starring in the same films as well as they lived in neighboring streets. There are only two characters of the film, Rick Dalton and Cliff Booth who are fictional personalities. But despite that even their images are based on real people. The friendship between Dalton and Booth reminded many the relationship between Burt Reynolds and his understudy Hal Needham.
Honestly speaking Tarantino deserves our biggest respect at least for managing to get such a brilliant cast in the film. Despite the fact that both DiCaprio and Pitt are very distinctive and individualistic actors, Tarantino somehow managed to get them to work together in one union hardly believable to work but it does bloody works in a great duet. It is really impressive how it works. Margot Robbie is just one perfect choice for the role of Sharon Tate
But the real discovery of the film for me personally was the 10-year-old Julia Butters who played the young actress Trudy Frazier working with Rick Dalton on the set of the Lancer series (a real television series). This girl will go far, well she already did playing with Leo. There are so many good famous actors that listing them all here is simply pointless.
Well, for me personally the picture was a real revelation today. I believe this impression will remain some days after. Tarantino is undoubtedly a genius but he is also a very talented con artist as he so masterfully hides in a prominent place the answer to the question: what, once upon a time took place in Hollywood. Bravo, maestro and thank you once again for these two and a half hours of total beauty.
website
RATE: 9.5/10
Quentin Tarantino no longer needs to prove anything to anyone: not to his friends or colleagues, not to his critics, nor to his audience. He can simply afford to make the films only for himself, the ones that he loves and admires, he can make them how he wants and whatever he wants. If you like the final result, well, then you are on the same wavelength with the director. If you do not like it, please do not blame me, you are not there yet. Tarantino’s ninth film, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood, is a verbal and visual declaration of love for Hollywood and cinematography itself of the late 60s. That beautiful fairy tale that he presents to us ended on August 9, 1969.
If you do not know who was Sharon Tate or if you have not heard anything about the events of August 9, 1969, here we go (Wiki): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tate_murders . I recommend you read the story before you attend the film otherwise it would not make sense. You would simply waste your time simply without understanding who all these people are and why nothing happens during the first two hours of the film. You will think: there are some strange, almost random characters are involved in a very banal household incident, they walk, they watch movies, they go to work , the try to solve their minor and boring problems, they feed dogs, they cook dinners, they act in Hollywood movies etc etc. They also conduct meaningless conversations with each other and carelessly drive around Los Angeles in luxury and huge cars. You watch and you think: why all this takes place? Read the history then go to the film. You will have a double pleasure enjoying it and the events will all suddenly connect and will make sense: every small and insignificant scene and episode will make sense.
If Tate Murders is not some senseless words for you then you will see a completely different story from the very beginning. It is beautiful tale of the golden age of Hollywood with a good horror suspense in such intense and concentration that even your great Hitchcock would envy. If you know the story right you will watch Sharon Tate who first appearance in the film happened 8 month before the faithful events, you will already know how and when it will end. You will be waiting for the horror to take place and watching those everyday common scenes will make very painful. You will also understand who these cute hippie girls and boys are: they smile at the sun, they laugh, they misbehave and they are ready to sleep with anyone who seems to them somehow attractive. The name of the street on which the events take place will make you shiver. If you already know the events that are about to take place on that ill-fated day, then every detail will be significant in those two seemingly boring hours while at the start of the third hour of the film Tarantino will show you what he really thinks. He is a Hollywood Don Quiote after all.
When the third hour starts you will suddenly realise that the previous two hours were made by Tarantino to lull your vigilance, and then to masterfully arrange the film shoots and get the guns out that will surely kill someone in the final. This is the classic Tarantino after all.
However the director can allow himself not to rush in preparation for the finale. The film shows many episodes simply because Tarantino is madly in love with his 60s Hollywood: he loves westerns, he loves those stupid television series that he grew up with and much more. He loves big beautiful cars and fantastic neon lights of Los Angeles: he shows them to us with his childish admiration. He knows how to shoot them and he enjoys every frame they get into. He loves long actresses' legs, short skirts and cool colorful boots.
Most of the characters in th e film are real people. These directors, producers, actors and stylists really worked in Hollywood in the late 60s. They knew each other, they were partying together and they were starring in the same films as well as they lived in neighboring streets. There are only two characters of the film, Rick Dalton and Cliff Booth who are fictional personalities. But despite that even their images are based on real people. The friendship between Dalton and Booth reminded many the relationship between Burt Reynolds and his understudy Hal Needham.
Honestly speaking Tarantino deserves our biggest respect at least for managing to get such a brilliant cast in the film. Despite the fact that both DiCaprio and Pitt are very distinctive and individualistic actors, Tarantino somehow managed to get them to work together in one union hardly believable to work but it does bloody works in a great duet. It is really impressive how it works. Margot Robbie is just one perfect choice for the role of Sharon Tate
But the real discovery of the film for me personally was the 10-year-old Julia Butters who played the young actress Trudy Frazier working with Rick Dalton on the set of the Lancer series (a real television series). This girl will go far, well she already did playing with Leo. There are so many good famous actors that listing them all here is simply pointless.
Well, for me personally the picture was a real revelation today. I believe this impression will remain some days after. Tarantino is undoubtedly a genius but he is also a very talented con artist as he so masterfully hides in a prominent place the answer to the question: what, once upon a time took place in Hollywood. Bravo, maestro and thank you once again for these two and a half hours of total beauty.
THE PUBLIC
website
review by Roslynn Garwood-Webb
The Public Film Review
It has been a while since we have seen Emilio Estevez on our Screens and it was certainly an absolute pleasure to reacquaint myself with one of my old time 80’s favourites in his Writer/Director/Actor role in ‘The Public’.
It's a sub zero freezing day in Cincinnati and the Public Library has become a refuge for the homeless as the temperature plummets and the homeless shelters are at capacity. Estevez plays Stuart Goodson, a quiet, unassuming, mildly mannered Librarian, who greets the homeless folk by name as they enter the library at the beginning of each day.
It becomes quite apparent very early in the film that the public library is not only a safe haven from the cold Cincinnati winter but its also a place for the homeless community to gather, learn and utilise the library computers to provide them with a link to the digital world. When one of their own is lost to the freezing temperatures, Jackson leads the charge in deciding that they wont in fact be leaving the library at closing time today, instead they were going to take emergency refuge in the warm sheltered confines of the public library. Even though Stuart initially rebukes the homeless’s stance, he soon comes around to the idea as he realises that in fact they are right in that there is in fact no reason the public library could not be a sanctuary to the cities’ homeless community.
Through the clever telling of a very real and politically relevant story, Estevez shines the beacon on quite a few of Modern Day America’s public issues. The Publicis quite a slow film, but it gathers momentum where it should and will leave you with the realisation that sometimes in life you have to make a stand and stand up for those who have a diminished voice, all whilst having to sit very close to the loud voices of politics and self machoism.
3 and a half stars
website
review by Roslynn Garwood-Webb
The Public Film Review
It has been a while since we have seen Emilio Estevez on our Screens and it was certainly an absolute pleasure to reacquaint myself with one of my old time 80’s favourites in his Writer/Director/Actor role in ‘The Public’.
It's a sub zero freezing day in Cincinnati and the Public Library has become a refuge for the homeless as the temperature plummets and the homeless shelters are at capacity. Estevez plays Stuart Goodson, a quiet, unassuming, mildly mannered Librarian, who greets the homeless folk by name as they enter the library at the beginning of each day.
It becomes quite apparent very early in the film that the public library is not only a safe haven from the cold Cincinnati winter but its also a place for the homeless community to gather, learn and utilise the library computers to provide them with a link to the digital world. When one of their own is lost to the freezing temperatures, Jackson leads the charge in deciding that they wont in fact be leaving the library at closing time today, instead they were going to take emergency refuge in the warm sheltered confines of the public library. Even though Stuart initially rebukes the homeless’s stance, he soon comes around to the idea as he realises that in fact they are right in that there is in fact no reason the public library could not be a sanctuary to the cities’ homeless community.
Through the clever telling of a very real and politically relevant story, Estevez shines the beacon on quite a few of Modern Day America’s public issues. The Publicis quite a slow film, but it gathers momentum where it should and will leave you with the realisation that sometimes in life you have to make a stand and stand up for those who have a diminished voice, all whilst having to sit very close to the loud voices of politics and self machoism.
3 and a half stars
CAMINO SKIES
website
RATE: 7/10
Six people who are total strangers from New Zealand and Australia go on the El Camino De Santiago journey to walk from France through the whole Spain. The trail and this walk is my dream to make one day. Hopefully we will be able to travel next year. The filming crew is capturing the six people moments: happy and falling, sad and painful as well as of celebrating and relaxing.
For me personally the story was both: uplifting and frustrating. Uplifting was in the sense of observing so many diverse soul taking such a hard path in life to explore themselves without fear: it is not that easy to walk 25 km each day with short stops. the words " I can do it" are still ringing in my ears. They are old, they are overweight, they have been not on a happy journey before taking these steps. It is rather inspiring to watch. From the other side it was very upsetting as I could feel so much pain thee people were caring within the,selves. My eyes were full of tears at such moments.
I though the film could have been made more intense but this is a documentary after all... I liked it.
website
RATE: 7/10
Six people who are total strangers from New Zealand and Australia go on the El Camino De Santiago journey to walk from France through the whole Spain. The trail and this walk is my dream to make one day. Hopefully we will be able to travel next year. The filming crew is capturing the six people moments: happy and falling, sad and painful as well as of celebrating and relaxing.
For me personally the story was both: uplifting and frustrating. Uplifting was in the sense of observing so many diverse soul taking such a hard path in life to explore themselves without fear: it is not that easy to walk 25 km each day with short stops. the words " I can do it" are still ringing in my ears. They are old, they are overweight, they have been not on a happy journey before taking these steps. It is rather inspiring to watch. From the other side it was very upsetting as I could feel so much pain thee people were caring within the,selves. My eyes were full of tears at such moments.
I though the film could have been made more intense but this is a documentary after all... I liked it.
LATE NIGHT
website
RATE: 6/10
Honestly I am not a big fan of Emma Thompson but she is very likable in this film.
In this particular film she is amazing. She plays Katherine Newbury, the host of an evening talk show in the United States, who believes her ratings are falling and she needs to breathe new life into her show.
This role was absolutely made for her as she stole every scene in which she appeared (please pay a pecial attention on her outfits and her earrings that look so spectacular scene after scene!).
Mindy Kaling played Molly (or No. 8 - the way Katherine named her show employees). Molly is Indian and she was employed by Katherine as a writer for her show, mainly to increase the office diversity sex- and nationality-wise as Molly had no official writing experience at all. Surprisingly Molly actually offers a lot of ideas to enhance the show TV rating.
The film had a smart and well-written script (written by Mindy Kaling!).
There were a lot of funny moments too mainly in the scenes where Emma Thompson participated.
This film might restore your faith in humanity and your belief in office diverse culture!
website
RATE: 6/10
Honestly I am not a big fan of Emma Thompson but she is very likable in this film.
In this particular film she is amazing. She plays Katherine Newbury, the host of an evening talk show in the United States, who believes her ratings are falling and she needs to breathe new life into her show.
This role was absolutely made for her as she stole every scene in which she appeared (please pay a pecial attention on her outfits and her earrings that look so spectacular scene after scene!).
Mindy Kaling played Molly (or No. 8 - the way Katherine named her show employees). Molly is Indian and she was employed by Katherine as a writer for her show, mainly to increase the office diversity sex- and nationality-wise as Molly had no official writing experience at all. Surprisingly Molly actually offers a lot of ideas to enhance the show TV rating.
The film had a smart and well-written script (written by Mindy Kaling!).
There were a lot of funny moments too mainly in the scenes where Emma Thompson participated.
This film might restore your faith in humanity and your belief in office diverse culture!
DANGER CLOSE
website
review: Oksana Newton
A movie built on true story about young Australian and New Zealand soldiers under fire of deadly battle in South Vietnam in 1966. 108 Australian and New Zealand young soldiers against 2500 Vietnamese soldiers. They were young , age 18 to 21, full of dreams and expectations with only one wish - to get home and forget about horror of war. They were dreaming about creating their own families, have kids and be happy. Unfortunately for 18 of them theirs dreams were finished in Long Tan, killed and destroyed in the battle. All film was showing a truly strong brotherhood and friendship between soldiers. No matter how brutal war was , they stayed together like a heroes till the and protecting each other. It’s was hard to except the fact that it is a real story, lives of young people who deserved to be happy. Boys who never got back home alive. In my opinion it’s a fantastic educational film for all of us. This movie made me think deeply about life and it’s meaning. I would recommend this movie to everyone. It’s always good to know a history of country where you leave.
website
review: Oksana Newton
A movie built on true story about young Australian and New Zealand soldiers under fire of deadly battle in South Vietnam in 1966. 108 Australian and New Zealand young soldiers against 2500 Vietnamese soldiers. They were young , age 18 to 21, full of dreams and expectations with only one wish - to get home and forget about horror of war. They were dreaming about creating their own families, have kids and be happy. Unfortunately for 18 of them theirs dreams were finished in Long Tan, killed and destroyed in the battle. All film was showing a truly strong brotherhood and friendship between soldiers. No matter how brutal war was , they stayed together like a heroes till the and protecting each other. It’s was hard to except the fact that it is a real story, lives of young people who deserved to be happy. Boys who never got back home alive. In my opinion it’s a fantastic educational film for all of us. This movie made me think deeply about life and it’s meaning. I would recommend this movie to everyone. It’s always good to know a history of country where you leave.
SMALL ISLAND
website
review by Bryanna Reynolds
REVIEW: Small Island By Bryanna Reynolds
“A refreshing take on performance art from the convenience of a film cinema”
Bohemian Rhapsody were lucky enough to attend the screening of ‘Small Island’ to preview the performance in a never before seen experience.You could say it was like no other experience.
This film was a live taping of the novel ‘Small Island’, which was performed by the National Theatre in London.
If you are looking for a play/film to inspire you to follow your dreams, hopes and ambitions, then this one's for you. Throughout the narrative we see the lives of three people flourish as they chase a bigger dream and life to the one they are living.
My favourite narrative from the three of them was the one of Hortense who dreams of a life different from the one they are living. You have to see it to believe it.
The production as a whole will have you on the edge of your seat, intrigued by what will happen next.
Before you know it there are twist plots and turns throughout the narrative that you won't see coming. It was refreshing to see the stories come to life!.
I would definitely recommend seeing ‘Small Island’ if you get the chance! The amazing people at the National Theatre performing in the play truly take you on a journey worth the watch.
website
review by Bryanna Reynolds
REVIEW: Small Island By Bryanna Reynolds
“A refreshing take on performance art from the convenience of a film cinema”
Bohemian Rhapsody were lucky enough to attend the screening of ‘Small Island’ to preview the performance in a never before seen experience.You could say it was like no other experience.
This film was a live taping of the novel ‘Small Island’, which was performed by the National Theatre in London.
If you are looking for a play/film to inspire you to follow your dreams, hopes and ambitions, then this one's for you. Throughout the narrative we see the lives of three people flourish as they chase a bigger dream and life to the one they are living.
My favourite narrative from the three of them was the one of Hortense who dreams of a life different from the one they are living. You have to see it to believe it.
The production as a whole will have you on the edge of your seat, intrigued by what will happen next.
Before you know it there are twist plots and turns throughout the narrative that you won't see coming. It was refreshing to see the stories come to life!.
I would definitely recommend seeing ‘Small Island’ if you get the chance! The amazing people at the National Theatre performing in the play truly take you on a journey worth the watch.
